![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
F1 Camel
|
All this time i thought banner advertising doesn't work. Ok, for the past few days this flippin' banner is bugging me...Has anyone ever used the Portrait Professional? It's only $99, if it works well, it can save sometime with the standard skin smoothening workflow.
__________________
__________________
Members don't see this ad. Register your free account today and become a member on PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photo Community, gaining access to posting privileges, contests, free plug-ins and other downloads, unlimited online storage for your photographs, reviews, free marketplace listings, and much more. |
|
__________________
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."- Hanlon's Razor I'm post happy, but Karma starved ...please donate some
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Guanaco
|
tried a demo, wasnt very impressed with it, a limited package i have cs3 and aperture 2.0 and it just wouldnt have served any purpose for me. When i tested it i used several different portrait shots with different skin tones and the results werent good enough.
|
|
__________________
Every Plant,Every creature has a story to tell; Discover its ways, it will serve you well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Camel Breath
|
I have heard a ton of good things about it. Heard some counterpoints like above also. For those that process a lot of portraits and such, they seem to like it. Others seem to like their original workflow better.
Like most things in post, manual gives the most control. If something offers levels of application, less is better. If you can't do that, perhaps a duplicate layer and then some drop in the opacity is the way to go. And as always, too much is too much. Seems most go overboard on skin smoothing and HDR/Tone Mapping. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Guanaco
|
totally agree with a fair percentage of shots going overboard on HDR. really delighted with CS3 and Aperture 2.0 so not going to change but cant make a decision between the two.
|
|
__________________
Every Plant,Every creature has a story to tell; Discover its ways, it will serve you well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 (permalink) |
|
Guanaco
|
I found a post from Jan on Nikon Cafe that said it was $89 for MAX, which is now $119. Standard version is now $79.
I am still up in the air, I have been learning some techniques with CS3, using guassian blur, etc. But PP does more, in one step. Whiten teeth and eyes. Reduce hot spots, smooth skin, seems to combine at least 3 or 4 action steps required to get the same results in CS3. |
|
__________________
Rodney- Nikon D300 and some lenses. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) | |
|
F1 Camel
|
Quote:
|
|
|
__________________
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."- Hanlon's Razor I'm post happy, but Karma starved ...please donate some
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#13 (permalink) |
|
Vicuna
|
I've used it and I like it. However, as already stated - it is very easy to overdo it. I'm not very good at doing this sort of stuff in Photoshop (it takes me hours!) so this was nice, simple and fast!
They have an ad in the July issue is Shutterbug - enter coupon code: NE641 and save an extra 10%. Bob S. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 (permalink) |
|
Vicuna
|
I have Portrait Professional & Adobe CS3.
I like them both, but PP is faster if you're in a hurry and don't want to spend an hr. editing a pic. I paid $68.00 for my version a few months back. And you can over do it if you're not careful, but it's really neat software. One thing, doesn't work well if your subject has glasses. regards, m. allen brunswick, ga. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
Alpaca
|
Tried the demo... like Kodak's Digital Gem Airbrush pro plug-In better.
|
|
__________________
SureFire __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ (2) 40D w/ Grips | (3) 580EX II's and CP-E4's | (4) PocketWizards | 10-22/3.5-4.5 | 17-55/2.8 IS | 24-105/4 L IS | 60/2.8 | 70-200/2.8L IS | 85/1.8 | 100-400L IS |
|
|
|
|